D&D General Things That Bug You

[Greg K]

I'm not a huge fan of the excessive escalation of hit points in 5e. The sheer bloat gets ridiculous.

Yeah, I forgot about this. It bugged me back in 3e (although I end campaigns around levels 10-12 so I just dealt with it and adjusted Massive Damage Saves)

 

[Umbran]

Making it worse,...

Mod Note:

So, we have a no-real-world-politics rule for a reason, and we would appreciate it if you'd not try to get around it like this. Thanks.

 

[Lanefan]

The thing that's always bugged me, across all editions:

The difference between being fully functional at 1 h.p. and dead (in 0e-1e*) dying (in 1e*-2e-3e-5e) or down (4e) at 0 h.p.; and that that one last little hit point holds so much more relevance than any of the other 37 you just lost.

There absolutely need to be some mechanics shoehorned in between those two numbers - 1 and 0 - to cover and allow for and codify the huge range of conditions that exist between "fully functional" and "dying" or "dead". Some - including our own crew - have tried, adding body points or a wounded condition or a consciousness check or whatever, to varying degrees of success. 4e waved at it with 'bloodied', and would have been really on to something except far too many times being bloodied gave benefits rather than penalties.

There's some design space here for this stuff if one allows for negative hit points but alas, 5e threw that out. Reviving and greatly augmenting the 4e bloodied mechanic such that you're hurt (with mechanical ramifications) at half h.p., seriously hurt (with further ramifications) at 1/4 h.p. and so forth could work. Now, on seeing this some will doubtless howl "death spiral!" in protest. Too bad. A death spiral - where the worse off you are the worse things get for you - is the whole damn point; and easily solved by simply keeping your hit points topped up.

A pleasant side effect here would be a reduction of the whack-a-mole problem which, while 5e catches a lot of flak for, has existed in some form ever since 1e-2e went to death at -10. Here, while you could still cure someone up from 0 or below and get them standing, their effectiveness would still be reduced and it'd take a lot more curing to get them to full functionality (i.e. above half h.p.).

* - 1e kinda split between death at 0 and death at -10, so it counts as both here.

 

[Greg K]

In my initial reply, I forgot the vast majority of spells introduced beginning with AD&D 1e. There are a few spells over the editions whose addition I like. However, I just ban the vast majority spells added beginning with 1e UA ban (I also ban several spells from he 1e PHB (and which probably first appeared in Greyhawk or later 0E supplements).

 

[oreofox]

A few of the things that bug me or Undead not being templates. It was one improvement Pathfinder did over 3rd.

5e's way of doing animal companions. It's gotten a bit better as the years have gone on, but it's the original implementation and WotC's reluctance to modify anything that came in the PHB.

Ability scores since 3e. I preferred them how they were done in AD&D (I didn't mind exceptional Strength, but some of the limitations on who could get what number annoyed me), and have thought of changing it back to that.

Sorcerers being based on Charisma for casting. Someone who's magic is innate and comes from within should be Constitution based. Charisma is perfect for bards, as their magic comes from their music, performances, and personality. Monsters are Constitution based with their DCs, there's no reason why sorcerers can't be as well. Luckily I'm the DM and have changed that in my own games.

The Warlock class. I know it fits a fantasy trope of obtaining power through making a pact with a magical being, but it out-edgelords the rogues in every character (which is compounded by the numerous tiefling warlocks).

WotC putting ASIs keys to class progression instead of character progression. Also, not having the classes give the +2 ASI instead of the base race/lineage. Again, luckily I am the DM and have changed this in my own games. They started the playtest with the classes giving an ASI when you took them, and it is something they should have kept with.

 

[Stormonu]

@Oofta - I heartily agree on the your fine/your dead state of D&D’s hit point system. A bloodied/injured/susceptible condition at half or quarter hit points that made it easier to tack on carrier effects or lingering conditions would be a nice addition to the game.

And while I can live with the death save system for 5E, since we’re discussing what bugs us, I‘d actually rather have something more akin to the negative hit point rules of prior editions - especially if there were brackets that had lasting consequences if you were revived.

 

[Mind of tempest]

I still do not get bards I do not even know why they exist?
why are clerics still so armoured as a default?
why half-elves and half-orcs? just play an elf or an orc.
why halfing persist despite most just being humans but duller and with no history.
lack of arcane halfcasters.
why are druids and rangers and how are they not subclasses, how do they even work?
why is divine magic and arcane magic exactly identical?
sorcerers need to be better.

 

[Oofta]

@Oofta - I heartily agree on the your fine/your dead state of D&D’s hit point system. A bloodied/injured/susceptible condition at half or quarter hit points that made it easier to tack on carrier effects or lingering conditions would be a nice addition to the game.

And while I can live with the death save system for 5E, since we’re discussing what bugs us, I‘d actually rather have something more akin to the negative hit point rules of prior editions - especially if there were brackets that had lasting consequences if you were revived.

I think you meant @Lanefan. I don't necessarily disagree with them, but it wasn't on my list; most video games do it too. Guess I've just gotten used to it.

 

[CleverNickName]

What's weird is most video games got that from old school D&D.

Eh, if you say so. The old red-box BECM rules from 1986 didn't allow the sale or purchase of magic items, and it's the version I grew up playing. I can't vouch for any of the others. It's possible that there are older versions that did, but I never played them. Meanwhile, the FRPG and JRPG video games that I was playing at the time (Dragon Warrior, Wizardry, Ultima, Final Fantasy, and loads of other NES classics) were selling magic items in every town. (It's possible that there are other games that didn't, and I just never played them.)

I stand by my assessment: Magic Items for Sale bugs me in D&D.

 

[jmartkdr2]

The thing that's always bugged me, across all editions:

The difference between being fully functional at 1 h.p. and dead (in 0e-1e*) dying (in 1e*-2e-3e-5e) or down (4e) at 0 h.p.; and that that one last little hit point holds so much more relevance than any of the other 37 you just lost.

There absolutely need to be some mechanics shoehorned in between those two numbers - 1 and 0 - to cover and allow for and codify the huge range of conditions that exist between "fully functional" and "dying" or "dead". Some - including our own crew - have tried, adding body points or a wounded condition or a consciousness check or whatever, to varying degrees of success. 4e waved at it with 'bloodied', and would have been really on to something except far too many times being bloodied gave benefits rather than penalties.

There's some design space here for this stuff if one allows for negative hit points but alas, 5e threw that out. Reviving and greatly augmenting the 4e bloodied mechanic such that you're hurt (with mechanical ramifications) at half h.p., seriously hurt (with further ramifications) at 1/4 h.p. and so forth could work. Now, on seeing this some will doubtless howl "death spiral!" in protest. Too bad. A death spiral - where the worse off you are the worse things get for you - is the whole damn point; and easily solved by simply keeping your hit points topped up.

A pleasant side effect here would be a reduction of the whack-a-mole problem which, while 5e catches a lot of flak for, has existed in some form ever since 1e-2e went to death at -10. Here, while you could still cure someone up from 0 or below and get them standing, their effectiveness would still be reduced and it'd take a lot more curing to get them to full functionality (i.e. above half h.p.).

* - 1e kinda split between death at 0 and death at -10, so it counts as both here.

Slight side note: a death spiral is only a problem if you start spiraling the first time you get hit. If you can take a couple lumps before you need to stop attacking, you'll be fine. CF the wound track from Star Wars Saga Edition (and possibly SWd20, never played that myself) - the -1 penalty didn't really matter unless a lot else was going wrong for you, and the -2 could be pushed through, But a -5 mean you need to stop attacking and start bandaging, which is a lot more fun than losing turns until someone else bandages you.

So yeah, wound penalties =/= death spiral.